WI what if pagan reformations actually happened

If your local preist teaches about the greek pantheon in a neoplatonic fashion, but the next town over uses the roman names and talks about them in an epicurean fashion, you might not recognise them as practicing the same religion, your clergy may reccomend staying away from them and divergences occur.

North and South India are "Hindu" (i.e. "Indian traditional religion") despite the hugely different languages, cultures, traditions, etc. I think the difference between the Tamils and the Sindhis is pretty large. Europe also has the benefit in that the whole subcontinent was very Indo-European by Late Antiquity. The only non-Indo-Europeans were the Basques/Aquitanians, proto-Sami in Scandinavia, and the Finnic peoples in the Baltic. All three of those seem to have had many Indo-European influences, hence why Finnic mythology is comparable to Slavic and Baltic mythology. In the Roman cultural realm, you add in Berber, Punic, Egyptian, Aramaic, Hebrew, Arab, and Akkadian/Sumerian/Elamite etc. influences. Those would be local. I think Rome could knit this together, even if the common man in Petra would have many differences with the common man in Scotland, let alone that of the common man in the Baltic. Observe Hinduism's spread in Cambodia, Indonesia, etc. to see the potential of a particular region's indigenous faith. The Romano-Greek interpretation of the gods, which had been long been applied to Celtic and Germanic deities, can absorb other traditions (Syrian, Egyptian, etc. had already been absorbed, and the more distant Berbers, Balts/Slavs/Finns, Arabs, etc. aren't impossible either).

If you want a later POD, my favourite underrepresented faith, Manichaeism, would work. Otl Manichaeism worked as well as it did because it could absorb deities into the tribe of light, allowing one to continue worshiping your gods in a fashion directed by an adept class.

From what I understand, it's a particularly successful "Gnostic" (a pretty diverse group of beliefs) sect. It has similar doctrines to other sects in the Persian world and especially the Romano-Greek world. Any solid "Gnostic" preacher could make an equivalent, and they no doubt be influenced by the local monotheists as Mani was the Zoroastrians and Christians and other Gnostics were Christianity in general. Probably not too "pagan" although it might be. Gnostic "paganism" requires a "reformation" in how deities are thought of. Loki, Veles, etc. won't be mere tricksters but will become pure evil in opposition to Odin, Perun, etc., which is a very Christian of those deities (although the Old Testament has Satan--literally "the accuser"--in the Book of Job who seems more like a "trickster" rather than a being of pure evil).
 
It would be very interesting to see a "Hindu" Europe. I suspect you'd see myths like the Illiad and the Argonautica speading in a simillar way to the Ramayana, with local translations and adaptions. In turn, myths from the outlying regions might be Hellenised, though what a Hellenised form of, say, that one saga in which Thor is in drag would look like is anyones guess. Over time, a roughly consistant mythic canon could well develop. Just from the best recorded mythologies, Greco-Roman and Norse, you already have the shared concepts of elder gods (Titans/Jötnar) overthrown by newer ones (Olympians/Aesir), primordial father-figures killed to create the world (Ouranos/Ymir), multiple afterlives (Tartarus, Asphodel, Elysium/Helheim, Helgafjell, Folkvangr, Valhalla) and pantheons that can be roughly mapped. Add to that not having a concept of heresy, and many competing philosophical schools, and it could produce a cultural-religious region roughly comparable to the Hindu world or Christendom.
 
North and South India are "Hindu" (i.e. "Indian traditional religion") despite the hugely different languages, cultures, traditions, etc. I think the difference between the Tamils and the Sindhis is pretty large. Europe also has the benefit in that the whole subcontinent was very Indo-European by Late Antiquity. The only non-Indo-Europeans were the Basques/Aquitanians, proto-Sami in Scandinavia, and the Finnic peoples in the Baltic. All three of those seem to have had many Indo-European influences, hence why Finnic mythology is comparable to Slavic and Baltic mythology. In the Roman cultural realm, you add in Berber, Punic, Egyptian, Aramaic, Hebrew, Arab, and Akkadian/Sumerian/Elamite etc. influences. Those would be local. I think Rome could knit this together, even if the common man in Petra would have many differences with the common man in Scotland, let alone that of the common man in the Baltic. Observe Hinduism's spread in Cambodia, Indonesia, etc. to see the potential of a particular region's indigenous faith. The Romano-Greek interpretation of the gods, which had been long been applied to Celtic and Germanic deities, can absorb other traditions (Syrian, Egyptian, etc. had already been absorbed, and the more distant Berbers, Balts/Slavs/Finns, Arabs, etc. aren't impossible either).
And that is an excellent demonstration of the importance of canon. A large population over a large area can recognise eachother as part of the same overarching religious tradition (at least to the point of being vedic) in a way that is truly remarkable.


From what I understand, it's a particularly successful "Gnostic" (a pretty diverse group of beliefs) sect. It has similar doctrines to other sects in the Persian world and especially the Romano-Greek world. Any solid "Gnostic" preacher could make an equivalent, and they no doubt be influenced by the local monotheists as Mani was the Zoroastrians and Christians and other Gnostics were Christianity in general. Probably not too "pagan" although it might be. Gnostic "paganism" requires a "reformation" in how deities are thought of. Loki, Veles, etc. won't be mere tricksters but will become pure evil in opposition to Odin, Perun, etc., which is a very Christian of those deities (although the Old Testament has Satan--literally "the accuser"--in the Book of Job who seems more like a "trickster" rather than a being of pure evil).
Sure it isn't perfect, but for the laymen I don't think there would be too much of a difference. Kind of like how Catholic Ireland still has a very large amount of pagan traditions, but in the Manichaen case it would he perhaps more overt. Trickster deities might, over time, be seen as something to appease over worship (although that describes a lot of pagan belief regardless).
 
North and South India are "Hindu" (i.e. "Indian traditional religion") despite the hugely different languages, cultures, traditions, etc. I think the difference between the Tamils and the Sindhis is pretty large.

The Tamils did have their own religion in the past, I'd guess. Even if it might have disappeared in the depths of history.
 
What if Julian the apostate had an heir?
A sort of universal secreisity. Christ came earlier as Heracles, balder. The avatar concept.
 
The comparison is often made to Hinduism, but Hinduism had from it's brahminical predecessor both a canon to build off (the Vedas) with additions (stuff like the Puranas) legitimised by the Vedic tradition. Neoplatonism, and Hellenic mythology as a whole, didn't really have this canonical tradition, and canon is incredibly important for religous fortitude.

Very well said.

As the pagans are being hard pressed by Abrahamic monotheism, they really don’t have time to go the Vedic route and let a canon slowly develop from centuries of oral tradition, cultural references and scholarly explanation. Rather, the euro pagans need to match the Christian canon with a relatively instant canon of their own. The euro pagans also don’t have the Christian advantage of building on the well-developed Judaic canon. There seem to be two canon options:

  1. Finding a pagan indigenous Christ like leader / religious genius and a group of extremely committed and talented advocates like Peter and Paul. The pagan New Testament is created and then serves as a basis for a euro pagan Vedic type “one truth, many ways” religion.

  2. Use, as you stated, the Manichean canon as a basis, then adding euro paganism and presenting it as a Mannichean based like “one truth, but many deities of light” type religion.

Option '2' maybe difficult to retain distinct euro pagan elements over the long run- especially if orthodox Manicheasm went more Abrahamic after continuous contact / competition with Christianity. Likewise, in regards to option ‘1', religious figures like Christ and the apostles are very few and very far between.
 
Last edited:

Philip

Donor
What if Julian the apostate had an heir?

Julian was in his early thirties when he died. Any biological heir is likely to be at most in his early teans. Jovian had an army.

Any designated heir/regent would need the support of the army. You could arrange that, but you'll have to explain why they maintain Julian's unpopular policies. Keep in mind that Julian's reforms were not popular among the pagans as well as the Christians.

A sort of universal secreisity. Christ came earlier as Heracles, balder. The avatar concept

This would be validating Christianity as a cult. How then does he exclude them from the governing classes of the Empire?
 
Stoicism by the time of Aurelius had developed something of a canon (e.g. the Enchiridion), had modified and less scandalous interpretations of the Hellenic pantheon and could be practiced by pretty much anyone.
It's biggest flaw imho is that it never developed a prosletysing spirit.
They might not of had the right canon to "go missionary". Christianity and later Islam, each have two canons:

Academic canon: Available to those who are educated and have the time and interest for a detailed study of Christianity or Islam.

‘Street’ canon: Easy to memorize key concepts of the religion. Everything else is just supplementary: John 3:16 or the “No God but Allah and Muhammed is his prophet” surah. Great for the uneducated- either devout or nominal. Also good for the educated who seek only nominal conversion or don’t have time for weighty academics.

Having two canons enables the presenter to tailor his message to the specific audience far more easily than academic based religions like say Confucianism (Chinese stoicism?). In short, if Stoicism is heavy on the academics and still wants to go “missionary” it is going to need to develop a 'street canon'. This might be very difficult to create in an "academics only" type religious system.
 
Last edited:
What if Julian the apostate had an heir?
A sort of universal secreisity. Christ came earlier as Heracles, balder. The avatar concept.
Really think that was far too late to hold back the Christian flood tide.

As noted, too many elite functionaries of the Roman system were Christian converts; at this point what they wanted was for the state to adopt it and settle its social message ambiguities in favor of the powers that be, and too many Christian apologists had outlined how such a cult could be useful to a Roman state in dire need of stabilizing forces. At this point I suppose a real irritant remained the country/"cosmopolitan" (as I characterize both the city centered local elites and the wide ranging traders) divide, but no cult the anti-Christian minority of elites liked would have particular traction on the country side of this polarization either.

What is needed is something much earlier that can soak up the "seekers" of various classes and unify them, then even if whatever events in OTL actually happened in Judea to underly OTL Christian canon had happened just the same, as they might well not of course, the Christians are just one more quaint and splintered bunch of cultists displaced by the ATL thing.

"Balder" I suppose is a reference to the Nordics, who OTL are pretty much unknown to Mediterranean classical scholarship at this early date. It may be that the magnitude of transmission of Mediterranean high culture to the Baltic was a lot more than people guess, and so if some powerful ATL thing were happening in the south, then it might have an effective echo in the North too. But again some small faction of anti-Christian dissidents in Julian's day will not cut it, not likely even if we imagine a movement for them to flee the Empire and run north to establish themselves in the far north. Not likely the Northern peoples around the Baltic will accept them on anything more than a personal basis as exiles for one thing! If they can manage even that!

"The avatar concept..." maybe indeed some ATL extra push out of India can soup up some known OTL cult or synergize a new one that can interpose and as noted, soak up the "seekers" before the Christians do that, and then who knows, it depends on details.

Already put out my favored Zoroastrian notion, which I suppose might happen even without a Pontic patron. Say some Roman dynasty of Emperors are especially taken with some Persian derived cult. Mithraism is often offered as an alternative, but I think as offered, it is too limited, being a cult exclusively for men and particularly for soldiers. That's well and good for capturing the militarized elite men, but rotten at the sort of grassroots penetration and permeation Christians accomplished by converting women and having mothers raise their kids in their own faith. So there is still room I suppose for a major mutation of Mithraism or a rival cult...as long as it has that ability to permeate the women and the slaves and other poor folk. And at the same time attract a bunch of Hellenistic philosopher types to harmonize it with Classical high culture.

If you don't like the Persian lineage, and I can respect that since I was largely shooting from the hip when I first elaborated this "Hellenistically generalized Ahurism" concept, and some detailed reading on classic forms of Zoroastrianism suggest some major pitfalls a mutant version would have to leapfrog, try your own hand at some Buddhist or Vedic derived thing if you like. Or even take a leap with quite other roots such as elaborating Isis or something like that, or a Romano-Celtic synergy.

Again, what is needed is 1) deep appeal, if not to traditional peasantries that remain rooted to their traditional grassroots paganism, instead to the "lazarus stratum" of the cosmopolitan empire or ATL empires, urban poor and women especially I think, for depth and deep grassroots, albeit maybe not in the countryside; 2) appeal to upper class Seekers who find the traditional paganism too limited and rustic and want to square their mythic energies with respectable Hellenistic rationalism and their cosmopolitan experiences.

Note that we can trade off some of 1) for broader "pagan" appeal since the name of the game is precisely to reduce that conflict and foster lots of culturally rooted extensions of old pantheons. But not too much; it has to say something to at least some of those low class people or the cities will be too hard to hold.

We might wind up with an ongoing polarization in which the urban power elites consciously value their countryside hold and are prepared to repress the urban masses. Demographically, urban areas tended to be power centers but also demographic sinks; country life tended to enable those who matured to adulthood to be healthier and stronger, and death rates tended to outrun birth rates in cities so that urban populations were always being renewed by migrants from the countryside.

A regime conscious of that might develop political strategies to keep the urban masses under their thumbs and count on recruiting soldiers from the countryside to do it, but I think that was kind of tricky to manage, as urban elites would have interests that tended to work against countryside prosperity. It was kind of a push between "maintaining order" hence countryside peace and security for traders, versus the one-way tendency for exploitation to sink its teeth into these rural stationary targets--any countervailing mobility of the country folk would work against imposed order. I suppose this is one of the factors behind evolving from Classical era centralized empires and kingdoms to medieval feudalism and manorialism, shifting the effective power base from city to country, and Classical culture showed little ability to stay ahead of that curve.

So maybe an ATL country rooted paganism might catalyze the transition from urban centered to rural centered power systems?
 
It would be very interesting to see a "Hindu" Europe. I suspect you'd see myths like the Illiad and the Argonautica speading in a simillar way to the Ramayana, with local translations and adaptions. In turn, myths from the outlying regions might be Hellenised, though what a Hellenised form of, say, that one saga in which Thor is in drag would look like is anyones guess. Over time, a roughly consistant mythic canon could well develop. Just from the best recorded mythologies, Greco-Roman and Norse, you already have the shared concepts of elder gods (Titans/Jötnar) overthrown by newer ones (Olympians/Aesir), primordial father-figures killed to create the world (Ouranos/Ymir), multiple afterlives (Tartarus, Asphodel, Elysium/Helheim, Helgafjell, Folkvangr, Valhalla) and pantheons that can be roughly mapped. Add to that not having a concept of heresy, and many competing philosophical schools, and it could produce a cultural-religious region roughly comparable to the Hindu world or Christendom.
There are some shared concepts with non-Indo-European paganisms as well, such as Tengrism and Finnish paganism. I wonder if they could also be integrated into this continental pagan milieu.
 
There are some shared concepts with non-Indo-European paganisms as well, such as Tengrism and Finnish paganism. I wonder if they could also be integrated into this continental pagan milieu.
I don't see why not. Hinduism was able to merge Indo-European and Dravidian mythologies.
 
Top